Dying of Thirst in CA. (Please send me some Perrier)

[p_rehbein]

God causes it to rain on the just AND the unjust.................so I don't think God is punishing California by holding back the rain. If this were true, how does one explain, oh, I dunno, say:

Massatulivinginsiness?

Nevagamblingda?

NewnevermetasinIdid'nalikeYork?

Washingindecadenceton?

and, come to think of it, the rest of the 50 States?

 

[dcontroversal]

Actually, you are taking a lot of Old Testament examples (I assume, since you don't quote any!) and applying them to the New Covenant. I don't find any judgments in the New Testament for specific people groups or countries, other than for the Jews that rejected Jesus, and of course the examples in Revelation 2 & 3, which were probably symbolic of churches in any time in the future, and warnings of things which God wanted to change, not the actual act of judgement.

Show me in the NT where God uses a drought to punish people.

The New Testament the covenant of redemption, with the end of all evil and rejecting Christ being eternity apart from God. As NT believers, I believe you are juxtaposing what God did in the OT Testament with the NT. Jesus is what the NT is about, and how he has redeemed us from the curse of sin and death.

I am the Lord thy God I change NOT
Jesus Christ the SAME yesterday, today and for EVER

The CONDEMNATON of the LAW is not directed at those in CHRIST

THE CONDEMNATION of the LAW currently abides on ALL who have not received Christ

And your argument above logically fails as God BURNS the world and POURS out HIS wrath upon the world exactly WHY?

Tribulation and ANGUISH upon EVERY SOUL of man that doeth evil. of the JEW FIRST, and ALSO of the GENTILES Romans 2:9

I think your theology blinds you to the reality that GOD consistently deals with humanity the same...past, present and future and God has DRIED up NUMEROUS areas on the planet that used to be GREEN and God consistently USES the lack of RAIN to punitively punish wickedness.......2 witnesses of REVELATION have the authority to do what> WITHHOLD THE RAIN that IT DOESNT RAIN...JESUS in the MILLINIAL REIGN does what to the NATIONS that will not come up once a year to WORSHIP?
Zechariah 14:17-18<-----withholds the RAIN

OT and NT examples of the rain being withheld due to rebellion and wickedness.

I suggest you study more before you start shooting down IDEAS that ARE biblical

I am the Lord thy GOD I CHANGE NOT!

 

[dcontroversal]

God causes it to rain on the just AND the unjust.................so I don't think God is punishing California by holding back the rain. If this were true, how does one explain, oh, I dunno, say:

Massatulivinginsiness?

Nevagamblingda?

NewnevermetasinIdid'nalikeYork?

Washingindecadenceton?

and, come to think of it, the rest of the 50 States?

No doubt and at the same time there is proof both in the O.T. and Prophesy concerning the 1000 reign of Christ and REVELATION that God still uses the rain to punish rebellion and wickedness as found in post 22 above. which places all two or three of my posts on this thread within the realm of possibility which is ALL THAT I HAVE SAID IT IS a POSSIBLITY!

My points stand and were not judgmental and or condemnatory...just facts and a possible reality

 

[jjtj22]

It is not Perrier but I believe it will be wet. Stay safe cross!

http://www.weather.com/forecast/regional/news/california-rain-flood-threat-drought-relief-middec2014

 

[p_rehbein]

BIG STORMS..........HUGE STORMS.........take aim at California!

(get out all your buckets and barrels and set 'em outside, cause it may not rain like this again for some time............)

 

[Oncefallen]

BIG STORMS..........HUGE STORMS.........take aim at California!

Typical weather patterns for So Cal. When it comes to rain it's feast or famine. Invariably this type of storm does nothing to ease the drought because it dumps so much so fast it all runs off.

 

[crossnote]

It is not Perrier but I believe it will be wet. Stay safe cross!

http://www.weather.com/forecast/regional/news/california-rain-flood-threat-drought-relief-middec2014

BIG STORMS..........HUGE STORMS.........take aim at California!

(get out all your buckets and barrels and set 'em outside, cause it may not rain like this again for some time............)

Thanks y'all, just now buttoned down the hatches, praising the Lord but keeping the ammo dry, due to hit here in about 3 hours.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

John Piper on Whether God Will Judge America: John Piper on Whether God Will Judge America

 

[breno785au]

I dunno, arnt we supposed to intercede for the world, not condemn its sin?
Not even Jesus, nailed a the cross condemned the ones putting the nails in but interceded for them.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Dryest in 1200 years.

California drought most severe in 1,200 years, study says - LA Times

Doubtful. The 1930s were exceptionally dry worldwide, and California didn't escape the drought anymore than did the Midwest.

People do know California, particularly in the south, is mostly a desert, right?

You might want to tell the EPA to stop diverting fresh water into the ocean to protect salmon and steelhead spawning grounds, so the people in the south can get a bit of it, too.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

To answer your question, yes we are supposed to be intercessors among other things.

Jesus taught repeatedly that his followers were not to sit back and watch wickedness in society propagate but rather to permeate society and influence it toward godliness.

Jesus Christ put his mortal body at risk repeatedly by challenging corruption/wickedness wherever he found it. Yes, He interceded and called for repentance. Yes He forgave and told those He forgave to "Go and sin no more." But let's not forget that it was Jesus Christ who fashioned a whip from cords and beat money changers out of the temple. There is no dichotomy between perfect love and perfect holiness.

God's own son was a perfect vessel of forgiveness, love, wisdom, and the example of prayer but He was also the example of God's immortal holiness. Read this beginning with the second paragraph.

I dunno, arnt we supposed to intercede for the world, not condemn its sin?
Not even Jesus, nailed a the cross condemned the ones putting the nails in but interceded for them.

 

[RickyZ]

People do know California, particularly in the south, is mostly a desert, right?

Unfortunately most Californians aren't that smart. I love driving thru the central valley and seeing the farmers signs about how the government is creating an artificial desert by not diverting more water south. What they don't get is that the government created an artificial growing zone by diverting water to the south.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Now they are diverting the water (about 300 billion gallons a year) away from the Central Valley into the San Francisco Bay and eventually the Pacific Ocean.

Why? Because in May 2007, a Federal District Court Judge ruled that the Delta smelt, a three-inch fish on the endangered species list, would take precedence fallowing hundreds of thousands of acres of fertile farmland and creating a 17% unemployment rate in the affected areas.

This is what all the fuss is about:

Personally, I think they should create a Delta Smelt fish farm to protect the species and redivert the water from dumping into the Pacific Ocean back to growing my salad makings.

But then "progressive" liberals are in charge in California so...

Unfortunately most Californians aren't that smart. I love driving thru the central valley and seeing the farmers signs about how the government is creating an artificial desert by not diverting more water south. What they don't get is that the government created an artificial growing zone by diverting water to the south.

 

[RickyZ]

Was that a poke? I'm not a progressive liberal, I just think that if people are going to make arguments they should do so remembering all the facts. And the truth of the matter is that the central valley farming region is completely artificially created. Not saying that's good or bad, just stating a fact that is too often forgotten.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Was that a poke? I'm not a progressive liberal, I just think that if people are going to make arguments they should do so remembering all the facts. And the truth of the matter is that the central valley farming region is completely artificially created. Not saying that's good or bad, just stating a fact that is too often forgotten.

So what's more important? Food production, or useless little fish spawn that have no redeeming market, social, or spiritual value?

Turn off the spigot to the Pacific and grow some FOOD!!

Might want to let L.A. have a drink every now and then, too.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

No, it was not a poke toward you. Your point that the food growing economy in that place and time are man-made is acknowledged. I was explaining the situation further and offering my recommendation toward a solution (e.g. Delta Smelt fish farm and sanctuary) which I don't believe the "progressives" are intelligent enough to implement.

For "progressive liberals," people must suffer to protect a fish. For neo-conservatives, nature must suffer to protect people. The truth is that everyone can win and neither people nor nature need suffer.

But "progressive liberals" and neo-conservatives continue to war over such issues from their respective one-dimensional ideologies though they're both failing society to the extent that ultimately, at some point in the future, they will end up in the waste bin of history as a result.

Was that a poke? I'm not a progressive liberal, I just think that if people are going to make arguments they should do so remembering all the facts. And the truth of the matter is that the central valley farming region is completely artificially created. Not saying that's good or bad, just stating a fact that is too often forgotten.

 

[RickyZ]

Well that useless little fish isn't so useless to the bigger fish who feed on it. So then we pump the delta dry, let the little fish die. Then the bigger fish starve and die off as well. So we may have a bag of almonds to eat in the store, but the guy who wants to fish that now dead stream for dinner loses out.

The problem isn't really about pumping and little fish. The problem is that man has allowed his population to grow to such a size that nature is no longer able to support us. So then the question becomes, do we keep adding to our unsustainable population, at the expense of the little fish, or do we act like we have half a brain and reduce our population to a sustainable level, thereby rendering the whole issue moot?

And of course the half-wits will answer, keep popping out babies and let the little fish die.

If you think it's bad now, just wait till Lake Mead runs dry. Then all the pumping in the world will not save us.

 

[RickyZ]

No, it was not a poke toward you. Your point that the food growing economy in that place and time are man-made is acknowledged. I was explaining the situation further and offering my recommendation toward a solution (e.g. Delta Smelt fish farm and sanctuary) which I don't believe the "progressives" are intelligent enough to implement.

For "progressive liberals," people must suffer to protect a fish. For neo-conservatives, nature must suffer to protect people. The truth is that everyone can win and neither people nor nature need suffer.

But "progressive liberals" and neo-conservatives continue to war over such issues from their respective one-dimensional ideologies though they're both failing society to the extent that ultimately, at some point in the future, they will end up in the waste bin of history as a result.

I'll buy that. Nice to hear someone take the middle ground for once.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

The problem isn't really about pumping and little fish. The problem is that man has allowed his population to grow to such a size that nature is no longer able to support us.

Wow, didn't expect to sit down to dinner and get a floor show too!

If you really believe that, I've got seafront property in Idaho to sell you.

Since the time of Thomas Malthus, who lived in the early 1800s, doomsayers have gloomily predicted that mankind would outbreed its food supply, resulting in catastrophic famines. Yet the world currently produces enough food to feed 10 billion people, and there are only 7 billion of us. That is, with 7 billion human minds at work, we produce enough food for 10 billion human bodies. Imagine how much food we can produce with 10 billion minds.

Now of course you will say, “But there are still hungry people in the world!” Yes, hunger remains a problem in some parts of the world, but it is not caused by the number of people. Commenting on the recent Somali famine, Oxfam, an international humanitarian organization, stated, “Famines are not natural phenomena, they are catastrophic political failures.”

Now, on cue, you will say “Well, we got lucky over the last few years and food production shot up, but we can’t count on something like that to occur again!” Why not? There is no reason to think that we are running out of human ingenuity. If anything, a larger population means more opportunities for the kind of scientific collaboration and increased specialization that results in such scientific leaps forward.

How about you now try, “Ok, but humans now eat higher up the food chain that we used to. We can’t keep that up and still have enough for everyone”? Sure, people in the developed nations eat more meat, which require much more energy input per calorie eaten than if we ate grains and plant proteins. But that doesn’t mean that we will run out of food. We are eating higher energy foods because they are relatively cheaper than they used to be -- and prices don’t fall when goods are scarce.

The falling price of high energy foods indicates that they are becoming more plentiful, not less so. According to the World Education Service, “world agriculture produces 17% more calories per person today than it did 30 years ago...This is enough to provide everyone in the world with at least 2,720 kilocalories (kcal) per person per day.”

OK, I've debunked your ridiculous "overpopulation theory." What else ya got? Oh yeah, I forgot: "I'm thirsty!"

You're going to claim, naturally (that's what misguided environmental advocates do), "We don't have enough water for everyone who needs it!" Bull hockey! We've got more than enough. Since 1900, freshwater withdrawals (i.e. production of usable water) have increased much faster than the human population has increased. Freshwater withdrawals have increased seven-fold since 1900 while the world population has increased only four-fold.

Lack of water is a serious humanitarian issue. But it is not an overpopulation issue. Water, although plentiful, can be difficult to move to those who need it, hence local water scarcity. As Karen Bakker (2003) states: "Water is one of the heaviest substances mobilized by human beings in their daily search for subsistence....Water is expensive to transport relative to value per unit volume, requiring large-scale capital investments in infrastructure networks which act as an effective barrier.” In other words, we need more dams, canals, and pipelines, not more abortion, contraception and sterilizations.

OK, so now you whine,“But we’re growing exponentially!” Um ... No. We’re not. We are growing, but definitely not at an exponential rate. In fact, our rates of growth are declining. Between 1950 and 2000, the world population grew at a rate of 1.76%. Between 2000 and 2050, it is expected to grow by 0.77 percent. So yes, because 0.77 is greater than zero, it is a positive growth rate, and the world population will continue to grow.

So, all happy again? Able to sleep tonight? Oh, I'm sure you won't. But I will. Good night and God bless.

 

[notuptome]

Bill Gates has the solution, he's making water from poop. Comment about CA being full of the raw material to make water by the process is being considered.

For the cause of Christ
Roger